Hattip to Dave Griffey at Daffey Thoughts.
News that I missed, courtesy of The Babylon Bee:
URBANA, IL—In a moving speech delivered Friday, President Barack Obama called for the nation to turn from fear, anger, and resentment, despite having stoked these emotions at every opportunity during his time in office.
The man who had carefully stoked divisions and pushed identity politics for a full eight years called the nation to turn away from divisive “politics of resentment” and instead be loving and inclusive.
“Common ground exists, I have seen it, I have lived it,” he said, though his presidency was spent turning people on each other and encouraging a culture of victimhood and resentment. “I know I spent a lot of time encouraging you to feel oppressed by each other so you would look to the federal government to fix things and turn a blind eye while I massively increased the power of the executive branch. But this time I’m serious. Let’s not hate each other, at least not until a Democrat is in office again.”
Go here to read the rest.
Yep. The only man who ever lived rent free in the skulls of the Left like Donald Trump was Ronald Reagan.
One of the hilarious aspects of the concluded Kavanaugh hearings was the contention by very loosely wired Leftists on social media that Zina Bash, a former law clerk of Brett Kavanaugh, who sat behind him during the hearings, was giving a white power signal, which leftists contend is the “OK” hand sign. The ancestry of Mrs. Bash consists of Mexicans and Jews who fled from the Holocaust. The next day Mrs. Bash, obviously a woman of spirit, engaged in a little trolling.
My favorite comment about this exercise in Leftist insanity was made by a normal man, who remarked that he had noticed Zina Bash, who is a rather attractive lady, but he hadn’t been paying any attention to her hands.
However, perhaps I have been too harsh on the Left. There are examples of notorious race-baiters using the “OK ” symbol:
From the only reliable source of Catholic news on the net, Eye of the Tiber:
Pope Francis has reportedly sent an emotional letter to executives and the marketing team at Nike, thanking them with all his heart for “taking the heat off” him.
According to a source close to the Holy Father, the letter, written in pencil and said to be smeared with what looks like the Pontiffs tears, repeatedly thanks the Nike team for “helping a brother out.”
My Dearest Nike Team, the letter begins. Words cannot express the gratitude that I have for what you have unintentionally done for me. Over the course of the past two weeks, I have done all I could to relieve the pressure that assailed me. I told reporters that I would not say a word regarding situations facing the Catholic Church, though I tend to speak about anything and everything. I attempted to change the subject by talking about how plastic straws are the real emergency facing the world LMAO. But alas, nothing was working…until you decided to promote a controversial American athlete. Thank you, thank you, thank you…
The letter reportedly goes on to say that he would be happy to endorse Nike and have them be the official pontifical shoe “if Nike executives and the Board of Directors found him worthy.”
Pope Francis concludes the letter by simply begging Nike to continue the ads until Catholics and members of the media forget about “this whole scandal thingy.”
Go here to comment. PopeWatch has been unable to confirm or deny that Pope Francis has authorized a plenary indulgence of ten years for bloggers writing stories about the Nike hiring of Colin Kaepernick.
(The American Catholic will observe its tenth anniversary in October. We will be reposting some classic TAC posts of the past. This post is from October 18, 2008.)
Something for the weekend. Two versions of Franz Waxman’s immortal Ride to Dubno, aka Ride of the Cossacks: dueling pianists and the full Hollywood treatment in the 1962 movie Taras Bulba for which the song was composed. Great to listen to if you need an energy boost.
Act bravely, my Brethren; take courage, and trust in the Lord. The time is fast approaching in which there will be great trials and afflictions; perplexities and dissensions, both spiritual and temporal, will abound; the charity of many will grow cold, and the malice of the wicked will increase.
The devils will have unusual power, the immaculate purity of our Order, and of others, will be so much obscured that there will be very few Christians who will obey the true Sovereign Pontiff and the Roman Church with loyal hearts and perfect charity. At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavour to draw many into error and death.
Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it.
There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy, that, except those days were shortened, according to the words of the Gospel, even the elect would be led into error, were they not specially guided, amid such great confusion, by the immense mercy of God.
Then our Rule and manner of life will be violently opposed by some, and terrible trials will come upon us. Those who are found faithful will receive the crown of life; but woe to those who, trusting solely in their Order, shall fall into tepidity, for they will not be able to support the temptations permitted for the proving of the elect.
Those who preserve their fervour and adhere to virtue with love and zeal for the truth, will suffer injuries and, persecutions as rebels and schismatics; for their persecutors, urged on by the evil spirits, will say they are rendering a great service to God by destroying such pestilent men from the face of the earth. But the Lord will be the refuge of the afflicted, and will save all who trust in Him. And in order to be like their Head [Jesus Christ], these, the elect, will act with confidence, and by their death will purchase for themselves eternal life; choosing to obey God rather than man, they will fear nothing, and they will prefer to perish [physically] rather than consent to falsehood and perfidy.
Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.
Attributed to Saint Francis of Assisi, Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi, Washbourne, 1882, pp. 248-250)
It is tempting to read this prophesy as predicting contemporary troubles in the Church, and many Catholic sites do so. However, after Saint Francis’ death his Order was divided between the Fraticelli and the main body of the Franciscans, with the Fraticelli being declared heretical by Pope Boniface VIII in 1296. Pope Boniface is known to us today chiefly as the pope cordially hated by Dante. Boniface was elected Pope by the conclave of 1294 in fairly suspicious circumstances after the resignation of Pope Saint Celestine V. Celestine died a year after his resignation, and enemies of Pope Boniface, and they were legion, accused him of murdering Celestine. I suspect the above “prophesy” was written during this time. Thus the above, in reference to our time, is not a true prophesy, but is rather an example of the only true thing ever written by Karl Marx: History does tend to repeat itself. The first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.
From Roberto de Mattei at Rorate Caeli:
An interesting video distinguishing between Liberals and Leftists. Classic Liberalism of the 19th century variety has much in common with variants of modern American Conservatism. Liberalism in the twentieth century is a long tale of the interaction between it and its heresy, Leftism. Today that heresy tends to be swallowing up contemporary Liberalism, as Liberalism continues its long trek to the Left. My Conservatism owes much to Edmund Burke and the Founding Fathers, and those luminaries tend not to find much favor among either contemporary Leftists and Liberals as they become increasingly obsessed with issues of race and sex and demand a State strong enough to allow them to build the utopias they seek. Soon any distinction between Liberals and Leftists will become a matter of mere names, as old Liberals depart this vale of tears, at least until events lead to a revival of Liberalism in the unknown future.
The first two days of the Kavanaugh hearing have been periodically interrupted by deranged, and I do not use that term lightly, protesters. Why the room has not been cleared of spectators is anyone’s guess. I assume the Democrats, at least initially, welcomed these protests while Republicans doubtless think there is political mileage in having the nation see just how loosely wired the far left tends to be. Confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominees have become increasingly useless over the past thirty years, as the partisan alignments of the parties have hardened, and inquiry into a nominee’s qualifications has descended into endless political posturing. However, at least in theory, this is important work that the elected members of the Senate are about. To allow this work to be interrupted by every fool who wishes to get some vanity air time, some of the protestors were taking selfies, is a debasement of our Republic. The hearing room should be cleared of spectators, and Congress should enact a law making protests in a hearing room during a Congressional hearing a low-level Federal felony. Currently such disruption is a misdemeanor. If people want to engage in this type of street theater at Congressional hearings, a higher price needs to be paid.
Ding! Ding! Ding! Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier of South Africa wins the award for most nauseating and blasphemous statement made about the Vigano allegations with this tweet:
How similar the Master and his servant have been in their hour of trial! “But he was silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” Mark 14:61 Throughout the ‘Trial by Media’ the parallels have been close & repeated!
PopeWatch will have to cut short this post before he uses language about a Cardinal he never thought he would have any desire to use.
Many Catholics often complain about priests giving anodyne, useless homilies. Rod Dreher explains why this is the case.
On Sunday, August 26, the day after the Vigano testimony was published, a young Catholic priest named Juan Carlos Gavancho preached a bold homily in the Santa Barbara, California, parish where he was assistant pastor. He preached about scandal, and standing up for the faith. You can hear the entire homily here, on his Facebook page. It’s 20 minutes long, but the most intense part starts shortly after the 10-minute mark. I have transcribed it below.
The reaction to this sermon was swift. Within two days, Father Gavancho was told by his pastor to get his things and vacate the rectory. His name was taken off the parish website.
Go here to read the rest. Here is part of the text of the sermon:
The evil has found in the Church a hold. And it is natural for people to believe that there is nothing else to do in the Catholic Church. Maybe many are thinking of leaving the Church. After the terrible experience of 2002, with the abuses, many people left the Church. Now, another opportunity, many people are going to leave. I hope they don’t do, I tell them that they need to stay, that this is the Church of Christ. But if they do, believe me, I understand. Because it is very bad what we have allowed to take place in the Catholic Church in the world. Because this is not only America. In the world! Everywhere! Chile. Ireland. Australia. Everywhere.
If you are Catholic, and you love the Catholic Church, you cannot just say, “Well, let’s pray, let’s offer a couple of rosaries, and we’ll see what happens.” You cannot do that. You have to pray, but pray for truth. You need to pray so God can act. He has begun to act. Who may think that yesterday, that a former Vatican ambassador from the Holy See to the United States was going to write 10, 11 pages letter saying this — asking for the resignation of a pope?! Who may think that? If you had told me that yesterday morning, I wouldn’t have believed you. But that’s what happened.
So, what are we doing now? Where are we going from here? First of all, we must understand one thing. This Church, the Catholic Church, is the Church of Christ. It is the Bride of Christ. St. Paul is right when he said in the letter to the Ephesians, “He has cleansed the Church with His Cross, with His blood.” She is beautiful. We have betrayed her. This is not an abusive church. This is a holy church that has fallen into the hands of abusive, evil men, who are trying to destroy the Church from within, since they couldn’t do it from the outside throughout the centuries.
But you must be aware that Christ is in charge of the church. He is in charge. Sometimes on days like this, we may not see him. We may not feel him. And we may cry out like we did at the beginning of the mass, “Please, Lord, help us! Have mercy on us!” But he’s in charge, and he will bring justice. He’s already begun to do that. These things I have told you are just the beginning. Just the beginning. Many bad things are going to happen, and we need to be glad, because nothing is better than the truth. To know what is happening, even though it may be ugly, it may be painful, to know it is very good. So, Christ is in charge.
Second, pray. Do sacrifices. Pray the rosary. Come closer to the Lord. Ask the Lord to be part of his flock. Because you will see many wearing cassocks like this, or chasubles like this, many preaching from the pulpits. They are traitors. So you need to have something that in the Catholic Church is called discernment: the capacity to know where is God and where is not. Regardless of it seems like God is here or it seems like God is there. No, no — now you need real discernment, because the Devil has clothed his children with shepherd’s clothing, to make it more difficult to recognize him.
You need to pray for discernment, to pray for the Church, to pray for you, for your children. To pray for your priests, especially for so many bishops who are good, still, and priests who are good, faithful. Who have suffered greatly all these decades, and all these years, being moved from one parish to another because they were preaching the truth, and the pastor or the bishop didn’t like that, so they moved to another place, and another place, living a life of great suffering — they are there. And it’s not fun. It is difficult. You cry a lot, because you feel lonely. Forgotten. Despised. Only because you wanted to be faithful to Christ, but your speech, and your homilies didn’t fit with the ideas of these people who wanted to destroy the Church, and who wanted you to say nice things to the people. Don’t make waves. Just go along with everything. Don’t make people nervous. Just, you know, speak about general things, so people are not aware of what’s going on.
So my dear brothers and sisters, then we must act, which is part of a process of conversion. You must act. Bishop Fulton Sheen, one of the greatest bishops that America has ever had … said that: “Do not look for change in bishops and priests.” Do not. He was talking to you. The change in the Church … will come through you laity. When you don’t give up, and tell your pastor and your priest and your bishop: “Tell us the truth! Stop being just nice, and smiling to us, and preach the Gospel to us! We want to live a holy life, not the life that the world lives. Tell us the truth, and we will help you to sustain the Church with our money and other things. But you, you need to do your mission, you need to do your job, which is helping us to get to heaven. To be saved. To give us the Sacrament, to love Jesus, and not just to be politically correct. That’s not the Gospel.
But that’s the temptation that you laity have fallen into. … Speak out! Do you want the Gospel? Do you want Christ? Do you want heaven? Do you want the truth? Or do you just want what we find everywhere in the world, which is what we really want to hear, what is pleasing to our ears. Demand change in the Church. It’s not going to be enough, just adding a couple of policies to this taking care of the children. It’s not going to be enough just to see three, four, or five cardinals resigning, and ten bishops resigning — it’s not going to be enough. We need to see real change. We need to go back to be faithful to Christ, to Our Lord Christ, not the world. We are here to change the world, not the world to change us. We are the light of the world; we are not equal with the world. We have Christ. We have the truth. The world is helpless. The prince of the world is the Evil One, and we are hear to fight against him.
Now, what I’m saying might sound very hard for you, and I have to say I’m sorry, but I had to say it. Because I’m sick and tired of seeing my mother the Church being insulted and portrayed as an institution of criminals. Because it’s not. It’s my mother, it’s your mother! The one who gave you eternal life through baptism, who gave you the courage through confirmation, who gives you the Eucharist every Sunday you come. She’s our mother, and we need to help her in these dreadful times. So my dear brothers and sisters again, I have to say this because I am priest of Christ. Many people don’t say that, and I was afraid to say something like that. There are more things I want to say, but I don’t say it because I want to be here next week.
But I need to say this, and I ask the Lord’s pardon, because I’m a coward too. Sometimes I don’t say what I should say, because sometimes I’m more concerned about my position. Pray for me too so I may be a saint. But suffering is hard, it’s tough, you don’t want to suffer. Pray, my fellow Catholics, in these dreadful times. Demand from your leaders the truth — only then everything will be fine. With Jesus! Not with cardinals, not with popes. These are human beings. Some are wonderful, some are bad. Only with Christ. Only by doing his will. Only by staying next to him faithfully, everything will be fine. And I tell you this: everything will be fine. The Church of Christ cannot be destroyed through anybody, not for the Devil. They will not destroy the Church, but they will take some members of the Church away — yes, that he can do. And we pray that none of us will be one of them. So my dear brothers and sisters, may the Lord help us in these dreadful times to have courage. I have my hope in God, and in you, the laity. You will save the Church.
I hope there is a Bishop with some manhood in this country who will give this truth speaking Priest a parish. The “with some manhood” provision obviously excludes company man Bishop Robert Barron, coordinating bishop for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.
“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”
The battle to get this movie made is worth a movie all of its own. In theaters October 11. Pro-lifers should flock to see it, along with anyone else who cares about life and truth.
As a Catholic I believe that eulogies have no place at a funeral. Of course I also understand that other people have different ideas. Aretha Franklin’s family has stepped forward to condemn the eulogy given at her funeral by the Reverend Jasper Williams, Jr., senior pastor of Salem Bible Church in Atlanta, Georgia. I guess this aroused their ire:
At one point, Williams asked: “Where is your soul, black man? As I look in your house, there are no fathers in the home no more.”
As for black women, he preached that “as proud, beautiful and fine as our black women are, one thing a black woman cannot do, a black woman cannot raise a black boy to be a man.”
Williams described as “abortion after birth” the idea of children being raised without a “provider” father and a mother as the “nurturer.”
He negated the Black Lives Matter movement altogether in light of black-on-black crime, falling back on a rhyming pattern of yore:
“It amazes me how it is when the police kills one of us we’re ready to protest, march, destroy innocent property,” Williams began. “We’re ready to loot, steal whatever we want, but when we kill 100 of us, nobody says anything, nobody does anything. Black on black crime, we’re all doing time, we’re locked up in our mind, there’s got to be a better way, we must stop this today.”
Do black lives matter?
“No, black lives do not matter,” Williams said. “Black lives will not matter, black lives ought not matter, black lives should not matter, black lives must not matter until black people start respecting black lives and stop killing ourselves.”
Go here to read the rest. His main message was that the only hope for Black America was to return to God. That of course is a message that applies to all Americans, and all of humanity, whatever their skin color. This whole uproar reminded me of this line from Scripture:
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
2 Timothy 4:3
Whatever the Bishop of Springfield Illinois drinks, PopeWatch would like to send a barrel of to every other bishop:
SPRINGFIELD – The former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, has revealed a set of facts and circumstances that are deeply troubling as they relate to the awareness, actions, and inactions at the very highest levels of the Church. Archbishop Viganò has provided his written testimony stating that Pope Francis “must honestly state when he first learned about the crimes committed by McCarrick, who abused his authority with seminarians and priests. In any case, the Pope learned about it from me on June 23, 2013 and continued to cover for him.”
When asked about this aboard the papal plane on his return flight from Ireland on August 26, Pope Francis said, “Read the statement carefully and make your own judgment. I will not say a single word on this.” Frankly, but with all due respect, that response is not adequate. Given the gravity of the content and implications of the former Nuncio’s statement, it is important for all the facts of this situation to be fully reviewed, vetted, and carefully considered. Toward that end, Pope Francis, Vatican officials and the current Apostolic Nuncio should make public the pertinent files indicating who knew what and when about Archbishop (formerly Cardinal) McCarrick and provide the accountability that the Holy Father has promised.
In this regard, I concur completely with the statement of Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, who yesterday “reaffirmed the call for a prompt and thorough examination into how the grave moral failings of a brother bishop could have been tolerated for so long and proven no impediment to his advancement. The recent letter of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò brings particular focus and urgency to this examination. The questions raised deserve answers that are conclusive and based on evidence.”
One of the most colorful cavalry commanders in American history, General John Hunt Morgan had enough exploits during the War for several lifetimes. Go here and here to read about two of them. Alas Morgan had only one lifetime, and that ended on September 4, 1864 when he was surprised by a sudden Union cavalry attack on Greeneville, Tennessee outside a house where he was visiting family friends. Here is a contemporary account:
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES FORCES, BULL’s GAP, Tenn., Sept. 9, 1864.
REV. W.G. BBOWNLOW: The General Commanding directs me to forward to you for publication the inclosed correspondence relative to the killing of the late Gen. JOHN H. MORGAN.
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
Lieut. and A.A.A.G. on Gen. GILLEM’s Staff.
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES FORCES, BULL’s GAP, Tenn., Sept. 3, 1864.
SIR: It has been stated that Gen. JOHN H. MORGAN, late of the Confederate army, was killed by our forces, in Greenville, Tenn., after he had surrendered, and in direct violation of the rules of war. You will confer a personal favor upon myself, and be doing an act of justice to this command, by stating what you know to be the facts connected with the killing of the General.
I am, Captain, very respectfully,
Your obedient servant,
Lieut. and A.A.A.G., Gen. GILLEM’s Staff.
To J.T. ROGERS, Captain and A.A.A.G., late Gen. MORGAN’s Staff.
HEADQUARTERS FORCES EAST TENNESSEE, Sept. 5. LIEUTENANT: In answer to your communication relative to the surrender and killing of the late Gen. JOHN H. MORGAN, I must say that I was with Gen. MORGAN. When he left Mrs. WILLIAMS’ he handed me one of his pistols, and said that he wished me to aid him in making his escape. I told him it was almost useless as we were entirely surrounded. He replied saying, that we must do it if possible. We were concealed in a clump of bushes, when a soldier road up to the fence, wearing a brown jean jacket; we naturally supposed him to be a Confederate soldier come out of the bushes. Gen. MORGAN stepping at the same time through the fence, the soldier demanded a surrender, much to our surprise. Capt. WILCOX, of the Federal army, with some other soldiers, rode up.
I, with Mr. JOHNSON, hastened towards him, looking back in the direction of Gen. MORGAN. I saw him throwing up his hands, exclaiming, “O, God!” I saw nothing more of him until he was brought to the street dead. I am satisfied that JOHNSON and myself were fired on after we surrendered, but by men so far from us that it must have been impossible to know that we were prisoners. I asked Capt. WILCOX to leave a soldier with me after I had surrendered for my own safety, which he did. We were possibly fired upon almost from every direction, but from such a distance that I am satisfied the men did it innocently. I, however, do not condemn them for firing on me after I surrendered, under the circumstances. If Gen. MORGAN surrendered before being shot I do not know it. I am, Lieutenant, very respectfully, your obedient servant.
Captain and A.A.A., late of General MORGAN’s Staff.
C.C. FRENCH, Lieut. and A.A.G., General GILOMAN’s Staff. Continue Reading
Ted Cruz, a giant in a Senate of mostly pygmies.
Despite everything, liberals cannot help thinking of history as a story of redemption. That is why they cannot help seeing Putin and Xi Jinping, Orbán and Salvini as reverting to the past. A future that contains hyper-modern tsars, technocratic emperors and intelligent demagogues is unthinkable. So facts are ignored or denied, and truth sacrificed for the sake of securing a consoling meaning in events. While post-truth populism has become one of the clichés of the age, a more defining feature of our time is the rise of post-truth liberalism.
It would be foolish to expect liberals to admit that their faith has been falsified. They would have to accept that they do not understand the present—an impossible demand, when they have seen themselves for so long as the intellectual vanguard of humankind. Whether secular or religious, myths are not refuted. Instead they fade and vanish from the scene, together with the people who embody them.
John Gray, The Rise of Post Truth Liberalism (September 4, 2018)
Go here to read the rest. Whenever any group constantly prates about how they are on the right side of History, you may take that as a sure sign that they do not have a clue about the past, the present, and, most assuredly, the future.
Colin Kaepernick has been hired by Nike, the seller of vastly overpriced sneakers to impoverished Black kids, to be its public face. Dave Griffey at Daffey Thoughts tells us about it:
Nike to conservative Americans
The internet can be an interesting place for research. Here is a puff piece Cardinal Theodore McCarrick back in 2008 at the site Whispers in the Loggia:
And joining Cardinal McCarrick at the Mass will be many men that he calls his “sons” – the priests and bishops he has ordained over the years and remains close with. Since being ordained a bishop 31 years ago, he has ordained more than 320 priests and 12 bishops.
“One of the reasons the Lord has blessed us with vocations is, we all realize we’re a family,” he said, adding that he always tried to get to know each of his seminarians personally before he ordained them.
Go here to read the rest. This post was entitled Golden Ted. Then we have this from the blog site Where is Father Haley? in 2010:
“Excerpts from the legal Settlement Documents include firsthand accounts that are also in the Newark Archdiocese records of an incident on a trip with McCarrick, then Archbishop of Newark, New Jersey, with a seminarian and two young priests when they shared a room with two double beds, it reads:
· McCarrick, wearing just underwear, got into bed with one of the priests: “Bishop McCarrick was sitting on the crotch of Fr. RC As I was watching TV with Fr BL [full names appear in the documents], bishop McCarrick was smiling and laughing and moving his hands all over Fr. RC’s body. Bishop McCarrick was touching Fr. C’s body, rubbing his hands from head to toe and having a good time, occasionally placing his hands underneath Fr. C’s underwear. [I was] feeling very uncomfortable while trying to focus on television, and Fr. B.L., started smiling. As I looked at the bed next to me, Bishop McCarrick was excitedly caressing the full body of Fr. R.C. At that moment, I made eye contact [with] Bishop McCarrick. He smiled at me saying, ‘Don’t worry, you’re next.’ At that moment, I felt the hand of Fr. B.L. rubbing my back and shoulders. I felt sick to my stomach and went under the covers and pretended to sleep.”
“McCarrick continued to pursue the young man, sent him notes and telephoned him. Notes reveal that it was the custom the Archbishop McCarrick to call his protégés “nephew” and encouraged his entourage to call each other “cousin” and for them to call him ‘uncle Ted.’
“On another occasion McCarrick summoned the young man to drive him from the Newark Cathedral to New York City. He took him to dinner; and after, rather than returning to Newark as anticipated McCarrick went to a one-room apartment that housed one bed and a recliner chair. McCarrick said that he would take the chair, but after showering he turned off the lights and clad in his underwear he climbed into bed with his guest. Here is the account from the documents:
· “He put his arms around me and wrapped his legs around mine. Then He started to tell me what a nice young man I was and what a good priest I would make someday. He also told me about the hard work and stress he was facing in his new role as Archbishop of Newark. He told me how everyone knows him and how powerful he was. The Archbishop kept saying, “Pray for your poor uncle.” All of a sudden, I felt paralyzed. I didn’t have my own car and there was nowhere to go. The Archbishop started to kiss me and move his hands and legs around me. I remained frozen, curled up like a ball. I felt his penis inside his underwear leaning against my buttocks as he was rubbing my legs up and down. His hands were moving up and down my chest and back, while tightening his legs around mine. I tried to scream but could not…I was paralyzed with fear. As he continued touching me, I felt more afraid. He even tried several times to force his hands under my shorts. He tried to roll me over so that he could get on top of me, but I resisted, I felt sick and disgusted and finally was able to jump out of bed. I went into the bathroom where I vomited several times and started to cry. After twenty minutes in the bathroom, the Archbishop told me to come back to bed. Instead I went to the recliner and pretended to fall asleep.”
“In a letter dated four days after this incident McCarrick wrote a note signed ‘Uncle Ted’ that said in part: ‘I just wanted to say thanks for coming on Friday evening. I really enjoyed our visit. You’re a great kid and I know the Lord will continue to bless you…Your uncle has great spots to take you to!!!’
Go here to read the rest.
An open letter to Pope Benedict in 2008 from former priest Richard Sipe:
While I was Adjunct Professor at a Pontifical Seminary, St. Mary’s Baltimore (1972-1984) a number of seminarians came to me with concerns about the behavior of Theodore E. McCarrick, then bishop of Metuchen, New Jersey. It has been widely known for several decades that Bishop/Archbishop now Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick took seminarians and young priests to a shore home in New Jersey, sites in New York, and other places and slept with some of them. He established a coterie of young seminarians and priests that he encouraged to call him “Uncle Ted.” I have his correspondence where he referred to these men as being “cousins” with each other.
Go here to read the rest.
From National Catholic Reporter in 2014:
— The day before a newly elected Pope Francis was to be formally installed at the Vatican in 2013, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick was celebrating Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica when he passed out at the altar and had to be rushed to the hospital.
It was a scary moment, and especially odd to see McCarrick stricken; even at 82, the energetic former archbishop of Washington always had a reputation as one of the most peripatetic churchmen in the Catholic hierarchy.
Doctors in Rome quickly diagnosed a heart problem — McCarrick would eventually get a pacemaker — and the cardinal was soon back at his guest room in the U.S. seminary in Rome when the phone rang. It was Francis. The two men had known each other for years, back when the Argentine pope was Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, archbishop of Buenos Aires. McCarrick assured Francis that he was doing fine.
“I guess the Lord isn’t done with me yet,” he told the pope.
“Or the devil doesn’t have your accommodations ready!” Francis shot back with a laugh.
McCarrick loves to tell that story, because he loves to tell good stories and because he has a sense of humor as keen as the pope’s. But the exchange also says a lot about the improbable renaissance McCarrick is enjoying as he prepares to celebrate his 84th birthday in July.
McCarrick is one of a number of senior churchmen who were more or less put out to pasture during the eight-year pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI. But now Francis is pope, and prelates like Cardinal Walter Kasper (another old friend of McCarrick’s) and McCarrick himself are back in the mix and busier than ever.
Go here to read the rest. McCarrick was no minor figure in the Church, but a major figure who attracted a lot of coverage. When Pope Francis decided to make use of him, he knew precisely what he was getting.
This should send conspiracy theorists shooting off towards the Andromeda Galaxy:
This sounds totally make-believe, but every single word of it is true: On July 27, 1963, less than four months before he assassinated President John F. Kennedy, Lee Harvey Oswald was invited to deliver a lecture to a group of Jesuits in Mobile, Alabama, at their House of Studies.
This, of course, didn’t just happen in a vacuum. Oswald’s cousin, Eugene Murret, was in formation to become a Jesuit. Since Eugene’s parents, Lillian and “Dutz” Murret, were among the only remaining family Oswald had — and they had shared with Br. Eugene his cousin’s trouble finding a job since his return from the Soviet Union, as well as the fact that he had a young wife and two small children — Eugene apparently took pity on his younger cousin. In a letter dated July 4, 1963, and forever marked as Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2648, Eugene wrote to his uneducated and poverty-ridden relative, Lee Harvey, saying:
Here at the [Jesuit] House of Studies during the summer months we have a series of lectures on various subjects given by different persons from the neighboring areas. These subjects usually deal with art, literature, economics, religion, politics, etc.
Oswald, who had never finished high school and was dishonorably discharged from the Marine Corps, knew next to nothing — indeed, nothing at all — of art, literature, economics, or religion.
However, since he had defected to and lived (briefly) in the Soviet Union from 1959-1961, Oswald “knew” a bit about life under a Communist regime. His cousi, Eugene continued in his missive, that:
We were hoping that you might come over to talk to us about contemporary Russia and the practice of Communism there.
Concerned perhaps that this might amount to a public de-lousing, Eugene double-clutches and becomes a bit more gregarious and expansive:
Go here to read the rest at The National Catholic Register. Oswald was a lone nutcase assassin, but his contacts in the last year of his life are expansive and peculiar enough to help establish the cottage industry of Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories that is happily chugging along more than a half century later.
The Pope continued saying the truth is humble and silent and is not noisy, acknowledging that what Jesus did is not easy. However, “the dignity of the Christian is anchored in the power of God”. Even in a family, he said, there are times when division occurs because of “discussions on politics, sports, money”. Pope Francis recommends silence and prayer in these cases:
With people lacking good will, with people who only seek scandal, who seek only division, who seek only destruction, even within the family: silence, prayer.
Pope Francis concluded praying,
May the Lord give us the grace to discern when we should speak and when we should stay silent. This applies to every part of life: to work, at home, in society…. Thus we will be closer imitators of Jesus.
Go here to read the rest. Translation:
We must have this ship back in three days!
Commander of the Pacific Fleet, Admiral Chester Nimitz
(The American Catholic will observe its tenth anniversary in October. We will be reposting some classic TAC posts of the past. This post is from September 3, 2012.)
On Labor Day we honor the American worker and the repair of the USS Yorktown tells us why. Badly damaged at the battle of the Coral Sea, it was estimated that the Yorktown would take three months in drydock to repair. That was unacceptable. With the battle of Midway looming the Yorktown had to be gotten back into action if the US was to have any chance at all against the Japanese fleet with its heavy advantage in flattops.
What happened next was a true miracle. 1400 civilian dockyard workers and sailors swarmed over the Yorktown, working night and day for 72 hours. Hawaii Electric staged rolling blackouts in Honolulu to generate the enormous power necessary for the mammoth repairs. The Yorktown sailed for Midway on May 30, 1942 with civilian workers still on board, completing the repairs. At Midway, four days later, Yorktown’s role in the victory was absolutely crucial, her planes sending the Japanese carrier Soryu to the bottom before the Yorktown herself was sunk. Continue Reading
(The American Catholic will observe its tenth anniversary in October. We will be reposting some classic TAC posts of the past. This post is from September 1, 2013.)
Every Labor Day weekend two men always pop up in my mind: Saint Joseph the Worker and my Dad. When I was growing up I always associated Saint Joseph and my father. I thought of Saint Joseph as the strong, silent type. The Gospels recall no speeches or quotes of Saint Joseph, but it does remember his actions: the refusal to expose Mary publicly when he initially assumed that she had betrayed him, his leading his family into Egypt on the warning of the Angel, the years of Christ’s growth to manhood when Saint Joseph labored to support his family. That was my father, a man of actions and not words. My father was not a talkative man, he simply was always there when anything needed to be done. From going off each day to cut steel in the truck body plant where he worked, to repairing broken items around the house, to fixing a furnace for an old widow who couldn’t pay a professional to come to fix it and then asking my mom to buy the widow a sack of groceries because he saw she had no food in her house, to defending me from a child hood bully, I grew up under the protection and inspiration of my silent father. Continue Reading
Well this is a good idea:
A Connecticut bishop has directed all his priests to recite the prayer to St. Michael the Archangel after every Mass in response to the sex abuse crisis now roiling the Catholic Church.
Bishop Frank Caggiano of Bridgeport made the request effective September 15, the feast of Our Lady of Sorrows, on which day he will lead a holy hour and Mass of Reparation along with all the priests in the diocese.
He asked that the St. Michael prayer be recited after every Mass beginning that day, and exhorted Catholics to “pray it personally as well.”
Go here to read the rest. At my parish we say the Saint Michael Prayer right after the homily and no prayer is said with more fervor. Here is the history behind the prayer:
In 1947 Father Domenico Pechenino related what he had witnessed over six decades before.
“I do not remember the exact year. One morning the great Pope Leo XIII had celebrated a Mass and, as usual, was attending a Mass of thanksgiving. Suddenly, we saw him raise his head and stare at something above the celebrant’s head. He was staring motionlessly, without batting an eye. His expression was one of horror and awe; the colour and look on his face changing rapidly. Something unusual and grave was happening in him.
“Finally, as though coming to his senses, he lightly but firmly tapped his hand and rose to his feet. He headed for his private office. His retinue followed anxiously and solicitously, whispering: ‘Holy Father, are you not feeling well? Do you need anything?’ He answered: ‘Nothing, nothing.’ About half an hour later, he called for the Secretary of the Congregation of Rites and, handing him a sheet of paper, requested that it be printed and sent to all the ordinaries around the world. What was that paper? It was the prayer that we recite with the people at the end of every Mass. It is the plea to Mary and the passionate request to the Prince of the heavenly host, (St. Michael: Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle) beseeching God to send Satan back to hell.”
Cardinal Giovanni Batista Nassalli Rocca di Corneiliano wrote in his Pastoral Letters on Lent: “the sentence ‘The evil spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls’ has a historical explanation that was many times repeated by his private secretary, Monsignor Rinaldo Angeli. Leo XIII truly saw, in a vision, demonic spirits who were congregating on the Eternal City (Rome). The prayer that he asked all the Church to recite was the fruit of that experience. He would recite that prayer with strong, powerful voice: we heard it many a time in the Vatican Basilica. Leo XIII also personally wrote an exorcism that is included in the Roman Ritual. He recommended that bishops and priests read these exorcisms often in their dioceses and parishes. He himself would recite them often throughout the day.”
The Prayer written by the Pope is of course the famous prayer to Saint Michael:
Sancte Michael Archangele,
defende nos in proelio;
contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Imperet illi Deus, supplices deprecamur:
tuque, Princeps militiae Caelestis,
satanam aliosque spiritus malignos,
qui ad perditionem animarum pervagantur in mundo,
divina virtute in infernum detrude.
This is the version I learned as a boy:
Saint Michael, the Archangel, defend us in the battle. Be our protection against the malice and snares of the Devil. We humbly beseech God to command him. And do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the powers of God, cast into Hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls.
In 1886 this prayer was added to the prayers that in 1884 Pope Leo had ordered to be said after every low Mass. In 1964, by Inter oecumenici, the Payer to Saint Michael, along with the other Leonine Prayers after low Masses, were suppressed. I have always thought that a great pity. Rest assured that Satan did not cease his activity in 1964, and Pope Leo sought to remind us of that activity and through the prayer to Saint Michael to help guard us against it. It is still a common prayer in my house.
Catholicism works every time it is tried. The current evils that beset the Church are caused by a straying from the True Faith by too many men who mislead the Church, rather than acting as true shepherds. The current crisis is a time to return to the Faith.
Cardinal Blase Cupich, symbol of the current Pontificate, strikes again:
Cardinal Blase Cupich has instructed Chicago-area priests to deliver a statement at Mass this weekend slamming a local TV news report that he calls “misleading,” saying it was edited to suggest he and Pope Francis were downplaying the ongoing clergy sex abuse scandal.
The clip came toward the end of a two-minute segment that aired Aug. 27 on NBC5 about the Archdiocese of Chicago cooperating with Illinois Attorney Gen. Lisa Madigan’s review of abuse allegations across the state. Since the interview aired, Cupich has been castigated across the internet for being seemingly insensitive to the sex abuse crisis.
Cupich: Well I think that the Holy Father on the airplane had exactly the kind of answer that was needed.
He was asked about the letter of the Archbishop Vigano. He said he read it. He encouraged the media to read it carefully and to come to their own conclusions. And that he would not have any final statement – any other statement on it. I think what he was signaling is two things; the first is that, you have to see whether or not these remarks stand up to scrutiny.
There are so many things in there that he says about so many people that it’s impossible to try to get into the weeds on this. And he [the pope] trusts the media to use their skills, their expertise, and, he said, their maturity to explore these questions.
For instance, look at the language of the letter and compare it to the language that’s in these websites and news outlets that released the document. There’s so many parallels there in terms of the kinds of things that they’re attacking the Holy Father and other people about. The other is look at, look at- look at these things that were said on an individual basis.
That’s why I clarified it. I offered a statement that addressed the three areas that he said about me. I suspect others are going to be doing the same thing.
So the news media now needs to go and press him for information. I read the Washington Post and other major newspapers and their first line always is, he’s made these accusations but offered no proof. Let’s let the news media do their job here.
But for the Holy Father, I think to get into each and every one of those aspects, in some way is inappropriate and secondly, the pope has a bigger agenda. He’s gotta get on with other things of talking about the environment and protecting migrants and carrying on the work of the Church. We’re not going to go down a rabbit hole on this.
In Cupich the Pope got a leftist who would be loyal to his agenda. He also got a doofus who isn’t too bright obviously, as demonstrated by his efforts in damage control which only extends the life of the story.
Of the oceans:
He lamented the lack of effective regulation to protect the world’s waters while also drawing attention to the perilous ocean crossings made by migrants around the world.
To mark the World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation, Francis issued a statement intended to galvanise the global community into saving the “impressive and marvellous,” God-given gift of the “great waters and all they contain.”
Go here to read the rest. Yep, our Pope refuses to answer the Vigano allegations, part of a crisis that threatens to destroy the moral authority of the Church for decades to come, but he has plenty of time to mouth his ecological platitudes. It would take the pen of a Boccaccio to do justice to this misbegotten pontificate. Nero didn’t really fiddle while Rome burned, but the Church is on fire and our Pope is MIA. Heckuva job Conclave of 2013, heckuva job.
From the only reliable source of Catholic news on the net, Eye of the Tiber:
Mere days after former Vatican ambassador to the US, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, alleged that the Pope was aware of sexual misconduct allegations against Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, Francis is said to have been spending a large part of his day quietly trying out different new emeritus signatures in preparations for his upcoming retirement.
“I hear you get a gold-plated watch,” Pope Francis whispered into the ear of one reporter in an attempt to change the subject of the accusation while in route to Rome from Ireland. But when the reporter repeated the question, Pope Francis was said to have pointed behind everyone, yelling, “Hey, what’s that!” before running back to his seat.
One of Francis’ aides, Father Tomas Demarco, told EOTT this morning that the Pope spent the rest of the flight trying out different signatures with “emeritus” in them.
“He kept his eyes on his paper for the most part,” Demarco said. “In the beginning he kept asking me if everyone was still looking his way and I said yes. That’s when he began trying out different new signatures. They were terrible, but whatever it takes for the man to retire, I mean, get his mind off the accusation.”
Demarco said that when Francis returned to the Vatican, he went up to the window in his bedroom and “Just stared out onto St. Peter’s Square.
“Yeah, he was gently touching the window as he hummed a sad little song to himself. At one point he began saying something along the lines of ‘No one gets you, Franny. No one has, no one does, but you.’ Weird as hell. He did this for a while until he started drinking. That’s when he went ape. He opened the window and started screaming the name Viganò over and over again with a type of vengeance that I haven’t seen from him since the last time we were in private and someone disagreed with him.”
Go here to comment. PopeWatch has been unable to confirm or deny that our current Pope Emeritus has advised Pope Francis that after he resigns he will be officially known as either Pope Emeritus II or Pope Avis I, whichever he prefers.
Something for the weekend. Adagio for Strings (1936) by Samuel Barber. It gets my vote for the most powerful piece of music to come out of the last century. It perfectly mirrors my feelings of anger, despair and hope as I view the current miseries of our poor betrayed Church. We have Christ’s assurance that the Gates of Hell will not prevail, but that does not mean that the Church collectively will not have many crosses to bear, and we are doing so today. Outside enemies we know how to confront; the pain today is the internal enemies that join the money changers of the time of Christ to sell the sacred and the simple believers. May God have mercy on them and us.
Here is the Agnus Dei (1967) rendition:
Leave it to Hollywood to foul things up:
Ryan Gosling is defending his new Neil Armstrong biopic against pre-release criticism it has garnered over a decision by director Damien Chazelle to omit from the film the iconic placing of the American flag on the moon.
Dave Griffey, a Patheos survivor, at Daffey Thoughts, describes why Patheos is the platform where rational thought goes to die:
I am done with Patheos. I will no longer go there – and that includes that train wreck of barking mad leftist tribalism built on calumny and character assassination and judgementalism, CAEI. I stopped going to CAEI on my own some time ago, but would visit when someone sent me a link, or emailed about it, or posted on FB. Given Mark’s penchant for banning anyone and everyone who doesn’t join in his political hatred of conservatism or stand within his circle of awesome buddies, I guess many saw me as a chance to speak to his blog when Mark had isolated himself from too much overt criticism.
In any event, Patheos is a den of evil and sin and hate. There are, no doubt, some fine people with fine blogs. I think of Dave Armstrong, or Father Longenecker. And I’m sure some of those fine blogs are from people outside of the Christian fold, conservative or otherwise.
But it’s too much chaff to sort through to get to the wheat. On the whole, Patheos is a left leaning, secular site that, like most on the Left, favors radical anything over the Christian Faith. Much of the action in the comboxes wavers between the adolescent ravings of a spoiled brat, to outright advocacy of heresies, blasphemies, intrinsic evils and sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance. If all of that didn’t align with the basic designs of Patheos in general, I could stomach it. Knowing that the most anti-Christian and pro-radical Leftist comments are in line with Patheos’s basic ideals made it all the worse.
I say all this after Mark Shea wrote a grand, Spirit led (his words) post calling for healing, compassion and love, he was still spewing his tribalist bilge on another post. It’s like the fundamentalist railing against the evils of alcohol between swigs of Jack Daniels. And yet, his is far more par for the course at Patheos than a glaring exception, as this fine piece demonstrates. Note the comments, those are important, too. The entire post is based on ‘we all know their wretched and evil hearts.’
We’re called to avoid the near occasion of sin. Patheos is, in many ways, the worst of the Internet. I’m already becoming convinced that my boys are right, that social media is mostly bad with a few shards of goodness. Like some of the blogs, not all of the commenters who frequent Patheos are bad either. Some, Christian, Conservative, or otherwise, are quite good, mature, thoughtful, and charitable. Even if they have strong opinions contrary to my own beliefs.
Many, however, are the worst of what social media stands produces. So why bother? At best, it does no good. At worst you can find yourself being sucked in. Thanks to Mark, who threw my name out on his blogs to be hashed and trashed by his faithful, I’ve already taken a beating there. It’s easy to want a pound of flesh, or even begin to fall into the sin of judgementalism or arrogance when you scan the many bad examples that define most of the sites and their visitors.
So from now on, if someone sends an email or posts a FB post noting the crazy, the evil, the sin, the blaspheme, the heresy, or whatever else one sees across Patheos on a regular basis (including, but not limited to, what one often sees on CAEI or other similar blogs), I’ll respond. But I will no longer follow the link. If I could ban Patheos entirely from my internet, I’d do it. For now, I’m done going there. Life is just too short.
Go here to comment. The unofficial anthem of Patheos:
What is the cornered Pope Francis going to do? PopeWatch suspects he will follow the lead of some Roman Emperors who, facing an angry populace, would behead an unpopular advisor and throw his head to the angry mob. So he needs a scapegoat. PopeWatch has heard that Cardinal Wuehl has been summoned to Rome. Better start practicing your goat walk your Eminence. Put your predictions in the combox.
Destiny attended Emmeran Bliemel at his birth on the feast day of Saint Michael the Archangel, patron saint of soldiers, in 1831 in Bavaria. From his early boyhood his burning desire was to be a missionary to German Catholics in far off America. Joining a Benedictine Abbey in Latrobe, Pennsylvania in 1851, he was ordained a priest in 1856. Continue Reading
From the only reliable news source on the net, The Onion:
NINTH CIRCLE, HELL—Stressing that the situation in the underworld was quickly spiraling out of control, Satan, the Great Tempter and Father of Lies, announced Wednesday that he would not allow any more Catholic priests to enter hell. “This place is completely overrun with those monsters, and frankly, they kind of creep me out,” said the Prince of Darkness, adding that every time he looked up, he saw another recently deceased member of the Roman Catholic clergy being cast down into the fires of hell, where each is expected to be tortured until the end of time by Satan and his minions.
Go here to read the rest. A few years ago I noted that I thought that Pope Francis was the worst Pope since Alexander VI. Pope Alexander, I humbly apologize for the odious comparison. Heck of a job Francis, heck of a job.
Author Damon Linker has announced in a piece melodramatically entitled The Unbearable Ugliness of the Catholic Church that he is leaving the Church over the abuse crisis. Go here to read the rest. It would take a heart of stone not to laugh at this, to steal from Oscar Wilde, at least for anyone familiar with the career of Mr. Linker.
He was a convert to Catholicism and became employed by First Things by the late Father Richard Neuhaus. He repaid Father Neuhaus thusly:
A few weeks later, [Damon] told me he was thinking of writing a book about First Things and its editor in chief. He explained that the book would be a critical appreciation of the achievements of the magazine. I said I would be happy to cooperate with such a project but I didn’t think there would be enough interest in the subject to elicit a large advance from a publisher. Moreover, this would be a first book by a relatively unknown writer. In early December, he told me that several publishers had indicated intense interest in the book he was proposing and that Doubleday had offered an advance of $160,000. He wanted to leave at the beginning of 2005 to start writing. Surprised but pleased by his good fortune, I congratulated him and renewed my offer to be of assistance wtih the book. I then said it might be helpful in that connection if I could see the proposal he had submitted to publishers. At this he blanched and, with obvious embarrassment, said that would not be possible. This was the first indication that he had agreed to write what in the publishing business is knowns as an “attack book,” which, unfortunately, is the genre to which “The Theocons” belongs.
That omission has now been remedied by Damon Linker’s The Theocons: Secular America Under Siege. Linker argues that critics who worry about the threat posed by Protestant evangelicals are worrying about the infantry when they should be paying attention to Central Command. In case you haven’t been following important developments to which the author is privy, Central Command consists of a coterie of (mostly) Catholic intellectuals who are associated with First Thingsmagazine and its founding publisher, Fr. Richard John Neuhaus. Welcome to the inner sanctum of the “theoconservatives,” where wily theologians and political philosophers labor night and day to tear down Thomas Jefferson’s wall of separation. Their goal, writes Linker, is “to sanctify and spiritualize the nation’s public life, while also eliding fundamental distinctions between church and state, the sacred and the secular.”
Such efforts, if successful, would not be fatal to the nation, but they would cripple it, effectively transforming the country into what would be recognized around the world as a Catholic-Christian republic. I hope that prospect is disquieting enough to inspire thoughtful American citizens to educate themselves about the theocons, their ideology, and the very real threat that they pose to the United States.
More about this presently. Consider first, however, the book jacket. The top of the front cover features a drawing of the White House with a prominent cross upon its roof. In case that bit of subtlety eludes you, the cover goes on to proclaim: “for the past three decades, a few determined men have worked to inject their radical religious ideas into the nation’s politics. This is the story of how they succeeded.”
If your paranoia remains unaroused, check out the back cover, where large boldface letters at the top ask, “WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ABOUT AMERICA?” This is followed by a series of sub-questions, in somewhat smaller type, beginning with “Do you believe the Catholic Church should be actively intervening in American politics on the side of the Republican Party?” and ending with “Do you believe the United States should be a Christian nation?” Then, in larger boldface font again, “The theocons answer yes to all of these questions. DO YOU?”
The back cover’s concluding paragraph warns that if theocons have their way, “the political and cultural landscape of our country [will be transformed] to such an extent that the separation of church and state as we have known it will cease to exist.” To put it gently, the cover material is crude, heavy-duty propaganda of a sort traditionally associated with unsavory pamphleteers of malign inclination. What it’s doing in a work that wishes to be understood as a serious analysis of an important intellectual phenomenon is a question best answered by Mr. Linker and his agent.
Since then Mr. Linker has been a reliable siren wailing against conservatives and the religious right. When National Catholic Reporter stalwart Michael Sean Winters, of all people, calls you an anti-Catholic bigot, as he did here in 2009 in regard to Mr. Linker, you know there may be a wee bit of a problem with the fellow’s professed Catholicism.
The news that Mr. Linker has left the Catholic Church surprises me on the same level as would the news that Bill Clinton is not a virgin.
Further evidence that the Pope is a willing tool of the Lavender Mafia:
A highly placed Vatican source told LifeSiteNews that Cardinal Gerhard Müller, together with his much-experienced three CDF priests, was dismissed by Pope Francis because they all had tried to follow loyally the Church’s standing rules concerning abusive clergymen. In one specific case, Müller opposed the Pope’s wanting to re-instate Don Mauro Inzoli, an unmistakably cruel abuser of many boys; but the Pope would not listen to Müller. In another case, the Pope decided not to give a Vatican apartment to one of Müller’s own secretaries, but to the now-infamous Monsignor Luigi Capozzi, in spite of the fact that someone had warned the Pope about Capozzi’s grave problems. The Vatican source also said that it was known to several people in the Vatican that some restrictions were put on Cardinal McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI, and he thereby confirms Viganò’s own claim.
When LifeSiteNews reached out to this very trustworthy and well-informed Vatican source, asking him about the then-breaking Viganò story and the archbishop’s allegations that Pope Francis knew of McCarrick’s habitual abuse, he answered: “Cardinal Müller [as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF)] had always decidedly and most sharply followed up on these abuse cases, and that is why he was dismissed, just as his three good collaborators [the three CDF priests] were also dismissed.”
Go here to read the rest. Each day it is becoming clearer that in Pope Francis the Lavender Mafia has the pope of their dreams.
A brilliant parody of Prelude to Axanar.
The press has been filled with commentary condemning Trump for his failure to forget after McCain’s death that they were mortal enemies. I wonder how they will react to this slight to a woman who was ever complimentary and loyal to McCain, even though his campaign aides did their best to sabotage her campaign 10 years ago. She brought the only excitement to that sad, futile campaign and many Republicans, including myself, were voting for Palin rather than McCain. I wish Senator McCain the best in the next world, but this churlish act of ingratitude demonstrates why I will not miss him for a second.
Philosopher Ed Feser nails it:
The pattern is by now familiar. Serious criticisms are leveled by serious people against the pope; the pope ignores them; and his associates and defenders disregard the substance of the criticisms while flinging ad hominem attacks at the critics. This happened during the doctrinal controversies over Amoris Laetitia and capital punishment, and it is happening again in the wake of Archbishop Vigano’s astonishing testimony. The pope refuses to answer the charges against him. The Usual Sycophants try to smear the archbishop and his defenders as disgruntled reactionaries. Among Uncle Ted’s boys, Cardinal Cupich leapt almost immediately for the bottom of the rhetorical barrel: “Quite frankly, they also don’t like [the pope] because he’s a Latino.”
This “ignore the message and pillory the messenger” strategy would be contemptible coming from a grubby ward politician. It is, needless to say, utterly unworthy of the Vicar of Christ and his cardinals. But from the point of view of cynical political calculation, it has its advantages. It has, after all, seemed to work so far.
However, I don’t think it will work this time. The conditions that facilitated it before don’t obtain in this case. Large numbers of Catholics hold heterodox views on matters of divorce and marriage and capital punishment, not to mention many other topics. They are quite happy with Amoris, the change to the catechism, and all the other doctrinally problematic statements the pope has made over the last five years. Meanwhile, many orthodox Catholics, well-meaning but naïve, have been willing to put up and shut up as long as they can cobble together some far-fetched interpretation of the problematic statements that seems to preserve continuity with past teaching. Then there are all the Catholics who aren’t even paying attention to these doctrinal controversies in the first place. Under these circumstances, writing off the critics as a minority of cranks can be effective.
The current scandal is very different. Even in the current low state of the Church and society, no one wants to defend predatory perverts and those who cover for them, much less take them on board as close advisors. Nor are there theological nuances here that might seem to provide the guilty a means of finessing the gravity of their offenses. The situation is easily understood, and, given its salaciousness, bound to draw the attention and disapproval even of people who ordinarily take no interest in Church affairs. This isn’t some abstract doctrinal controversy. It’s a question of what the pope and the cardinals closest to him knew about “Uncle Ted” and when they knew it. Under these circumstances, refusing to comment except to smear your accusers only lends plausibility to the accusations.
Go here to read the rest. This pontificate has reached a crisis point completely of its own making. Time for one of my favorite poems:
(The American Catholic will observe its tenth anniversary in October. We will be reposting some classic TAC posts of the past. This post is from August 29, 2011.)
August 29 is the feast day of the beheading of John the Baptist, the herald of Christ. Charlton Heston, in the video clip above, gave a powerful portrayal of the Baptist in The Greatest Story Ever Told, capturing the raw courage and energy that animated John the Baptist as a result of the blazing faith he had in God. Like Elijah, John came out of the wilderness to fearlessly proclaim the word of God, but what Elijah and the other prophets could only glimpse darkly, the coming of the Messiah, John saw with his own eyes. The last and greatest of the prophets, John fulfilled the role of Elijah as proclaimed by the prophet Malachi:
Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord. Continue Reading
News that I missed, courtesy of The Babylon Bee:
VATICAN CITY—In a private moment of reflection after watching one of his cardinals state that the head of the Roman Catholic Church was too busy speaking about the environment, addressing migrant issues, and “carrying on the work of the church” to address victims of the Church’s horrific sex abuse scandal, the Pontiff suddenly realized he might actually be the eschatological Antichrist.
“Oh man,” he murmured as he took a good, hard look at himself in the mirror. “Too busy talking about the environment to care for those abused by the Church? That sounds so bad. I wonder if I’m actually the Antichrist. Or at least an antichrist, like the ones John wrote about.” He took a few minutes to think about it, shaking his head and muttering to himself.
Go here to read the rest. If Pope Francis were the anti-Christ however, I would expect to hear an announcement from Satan seeking to disassociate himself from the doings of Pope Francis. “I didn’t tempt him to ignore McCarrick, that was all his doing. The Commie Cross? Please, I am the infinite evil but I have never been accused of being fond of kitsch. My chosen agents among mortals are almost always highly intelligent men and women of the world, leaders to lead others into the pit. A bumbler like Cupich would never get even a no salary internship with my organization. Hell hath its standards. No, the anti-Christ is on his own and I disclaim any responsibility for the mess he is making.”
If PopeWatch had to choose the perfect symbol of this pontificate, Cardinal Cupich would be chosen:
In a television interview with NBC News, Cardinal Cupich commented on a recent 11-page statement by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, former papal nuncio to the United States, that alleges a series of misdeeds by high-ranking Catholic prelates, including Pope Francis himself.
“The pope has a bigger agenda. He’s gotta get on with other things, of talking about the environment and protecting migrants and carrying on the work of the Church,” Cardinal Cupich said.
“We’re not going to go down a rabbit hole on this,” he added.
Who knew that Cardinal Cupich reads The Babylon Bee for talking points?
Go here to read the rest. Got it Cardinal. In your eyes the Pope’s left wing agenda is more important than whether he turned a blind eye to McCarrick pressuring seminarians for sexual favors. Later in the interview Cupich attempted to play the race card contending that the Pope’s critics don’t like him because he is a Latino. Where to begin? The Pope has critics around the globe. Latino is an American term rarely used in Latin America. The Pope is 100% Italian in blood, so arguing this is about race is ludicrous. Finally, only a completely delusional individual like Cupich could possibly contend that the critics of the Pope are motivated by racial or national animus. The Pope appoints left wing fools to misgovern mother Church would be typical of actual criticism directed towards the Pope rather than the complete bovine droppings that Cupich is attempting to peddle.
Chalk up another victory for the blue collar billionaire:
US President Donald Trump and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto announced a new US-Mexico trade deal on Monday, completing a major step toward the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA.
The deal is the result of five weeks of intense one-on-one talks between the Trump administration and Mexican officials.
It’s not final, since Canada is still involved in the NAFTA process, but Trump said the US and Mexico could move forward with a bilateral agreement if the Canadians drive a hard bargain.
Here’s a rundown of the major changes in the agreement. It would:
- Require that for a car to move between the US and Mexico without being subject to tariffs, 75% of the car must originate in a NAFTA country. This would be up from the current 62.5%.
- Establish that 40% to 45% of a car or truck’s content must be made by workers earning more than $16 an hour. This is a push that could help the US retain more auto work. US auto unions have been fighting for such a change for some time.
- Strengthen rules of origin for “chemicals, steel-intensive products, glass, and optical fiber” goods. Similar to autos, this would strengthen the requirements for goods to move across the US-Mexican border tariff-free.
- Toughen rules for textile supply chains to push countries toward producing more apparel domestically.
- Strengthen enforcement mechanisms for intellectual property violations and protect intellectual property. For instance, the deal would set the minimum for copyright protections at 75 years.
- Establish a zero-tariff level for digital content such as e-books and software, as well as strengthen distributor and consumer protections for digital goods.
- Mexico would raise its de minimis shipment value level to $100 from the current $50. (A de minimis shipment value is the threshold at which a business has to pay duties on goods moving across the border and are subject to more stringent security checks.) Small US businesses or persons shipping goods worth $100 or less to Mexico would not be subject to tariffs and would face simpler customs checks.
Go here to read the rest. Not coincidentally the stock market reached a record high yesterday. Go here to read all about it. For an unsophisticated loud mouth boob, as his critics portray him, Trump is showing himself to be an excellent steward of the economy, possibly the best since Reagan. Well played, Mr. President, well played.
In 1978, after the election of John Paul I, the late William F. Buckley interviewed the late Malachi Martin on his show Firing Line. Martin, a former Jesuit Priest, was the ultimate Vatican insider, and his comments over the years in articles, books and interviews were alarm bells at the evil within the Church that now has exploded into view for all to see.
1. One Peter Five has a story from journalist Aldo Maria Valli describing the background on how Archbishop Vigano came to draft his bombshell statement:
The heart of the matter is that Pope Francis also knew, according to Viganò. And yet he allowed McCarrick to circulate undisturbed, making a joke of the bans imposed on him by Benedict XVI. Francis knew at least since March 2013, when Viganò himself, responding to a question asked by the Pope during a face-to-face meeting, told him that in the Vatican there is a large dossier on McCarrick and he needs to read it.
With respect to our previous encounter, there is the new development of the findings which have emerged from the grand jury investigation in Pennsylvania, and Viganò confirms that the image created by the findings is correct. The sexual abuses constitute a phenomenon more extensive than anyone could imagine, and it is not correct to speak of pedophilia, because the overwhelming majority of cases deal with homosexual priests who go hunting for teenage young men. It is more correct, says the archbishop, to speak about ephebophilia, if anything. But the main point is that the web of complicity, silence, cover-up and reciprocal favors extends so far that there are no words to describe it, and it involves everyone at the highest levels, both in America and in Rome.
We sit there, once again, stunned. Because of my work we had a sense that there was some of this, but for Catholics like us, born and raised in the womb of Mother Church, it is truly difficult to swallow such a mouthful.
My question is thus the most naïve of all: “Why?”
And the response of the archbishop freezes my blood: “Because the cracks of which Paul VI spoke, from which he said the smoke of Satan would infiltrate the house of God, have become chasms. The devil is working overtime. And to not admit that, or to turn our face away from it, would be our greatest sin.”
I realize that we have not yet had a moment to speak alone face-to-face, as the archbishop had requested. He has spoken in front of everyone. I ask him if he would like go into another room with me, without my wife, daughters, and grandsons, but he says no, it’s okay just like this. It is understood that he is content as we are. For us it is a bit like listening to a grandfather tell us tales of far off worlds, and we so wish that at a certain point he would say that its all fiction. But instead, the world of which he is speaking is our world. He speaks of our Church. He speaks of our supreme pastors.
There remains basically only one question: Why is the archbishop telling us all this? What does he want from me?
This time, I ask him, and the response is that he has written a memoir in which he recounts all of the circumstances of which he has spoken. Including the meeting of June 23, 2013, with the Pope, when he, Viganò, informed Francis about the dossier on McCarrick.
“And so,” he says to me, “if you will permit me I would like to give you my memoir, which demonstrates that the Pope knew and that he did not act. And then you, after evaluating it, may decide whether to publish it or not on your blog, which is widely read. I want this to be known. I do not do this with a light heart, but I think it is the only way left to attempt a change, an authentic conversion.”
“I understand. Will you give it only to me?”
“No. I will give it to another Italian blogger, to one in England, to an American, to a Canadian. Translations will be made into English and Spanish.”
Go here to read the rest.
2. Archbishop Vigano responds to criticisms of his handling of the Archbishop Nienstedt case:
The accusations date back to a 2016 New York Times report, alleging that, as U.S. Nuncio, Viganò “quashed” an independent investigation into sexual misconduct on the part of Archbishop John Nienstedt, who was found innocent by police authorities.
The report specifically alleges that, during an April 2014 meeting at the Nunciature in Washington D.C., Viganò ordered two auxiliary bishops of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis to halt the investigation into Nienstedt. The report further alleges that Viganò “ordered church officials to destroy a letter they wrote to him protesting the decision.”
The New York Times based its report on a memorandum written by Father Dan Griffith, then-liaison to the lawyers conducting the inquiry, and delegate for the protection of minors in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis. Griffith wrote that the order to call off the investigation and destroy evidence amounted to “a good old fashioned cover-up to preserve power and avoid scandal,” the New York Times said.
These allegations against the former U.S. Nuncio have now resurfaced, and are being used to discredit or call into question the credibility of his testimony implicating Pope Francis and several senior prelates in the McCarrick abuse cover-up.
But in his two-page written statement, dated August 26, 2018 and published here below, Archbishop Viganò insists these accusations are “false,” presents his account of the events associated with the allegations, and provides convincing evidence, based on official documentation (including several letters here below), to prove his innocence.
Vigano’s statement and the supporting documents also raise questions about why the Vatican has never publicly cleared his name.
What really happened?
In his written statement, Archbishop Viganò recounts that he met with Archbishop Neinstedt and two Auxiliary Bishops — Mons. Lee A. Piché and Mons. Andrew Cozzens — on April 12, 2014, at the apostolic nunciature in Washington, D.C., to discuss the ongoing investigation into the Archbishop. Father Griffith, he notes, was not present.
At that meeting, several affidavits were presented to him, one alleging that Nienstedt had “had an affair with a Swiss Guard during his service in the Vatican some twenty years prior.”
Viganò explains that “these affidavits were collected by the firm, Greene Espel, who was retained by Father Griffith on behalf of the Archdiocese to investigate Archbishop Nienstedt.” He adds that the firm “belongs to the group ‘Lawyers for All Families,’ who fought against Archbishop Nienstedt over the approval of same-sex marriage in the State of Minnesota.”
The former U.S. Nuncio then notes: “Private investigators from the Greene Espel firm had conducted an inquiry in an unbalanced and prosecutorial style, and now wanted immediately to extend their investigation to the Pontifical Swiss Guard, without first hearing Archbishop Nienstedt.”
According to Viganò, at a certain moment in the meeting, he suggested that the bishops “tell the Greene Espel lawyers that it appeared to me appropriate that Archbishop Nienstedt be heard before taking this step – audiatur et altera pars – which they had not yet done. The bishops accepted my suggestion,” he writes.
After the meeting, Bishop Piché phoned Father Griffith from the airport, saying the meeting was positive, and there was promise of a good resolution on the horizon.
Despite this, the following morning, Archbishop Viganò says he received a letter at the Nunciature signed by the two Auxiliary Bishops, “falsely asserting” that he “had suggested the investigation be stopped.”
In comments to LifeSite, Viganò said that, immediately after reading the letter, he called Bishop Pichè and said: “What is this? I never said to stop the investigation. I proposed that it would be appropriate to first interrogate the Archbishop. Please remove the letter from the computer and from the archdiocesan archives.”
Go here to Lifesite News to read the rest.
3. Vigano is currently in hiding, fearful for his life. See this interview on EWTN with Edward Pentin:
4, Rod Dreher provides an English translation from a column of Vatican Journalist Marco Tossatti putting the pieces of the background of this story together:
Or, to explain it better, this man, who with his denunciation [of Bergoglio] has everything to lose and nothing to gain, formerly had the seal of papal approval at the time of Benedict XVI, who held him in high regard. Then [Secretary of State] Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone (the one who built himself a penthouse using money stolen from Bambino Gesù Hospital), saw fit to remove Viganò, sending him to the USA as nuncio. We do not need to use our imagination here to see that Providence follows very strange paths: because Bertone thought he would cut off the legs of one of his enemies in his Italian affairs, and yet without intending to he sent Viganò to the nation that would become, under Bergoglio’s pontificate, a key country for the exposure of evil within the Church.
Viganò was thus removed from his position, unbeknownst to the German Pope, who, surrounded by enemies and without practical power, resigned shortly thereafter, basically admitting that he was no longer able to carry out his mission: there were too many Judases surrounding him!
Meanwhile, the new boss, Bergoglio, while placing gay-minded men in key positions everywhere in Italy, from the aforementioned Dario Edoardo Viganò to Nunzio Galantino [made President of the Italian Bishops’ Conference by Bergoglio in 2013] to Vincenzo Paglia [made President of the Pontifical Academy for Life], at the same time launched a war without quarter against the American bishops for their crime of opposing the Obama administration’s pro-abortion and pro-gender-ideology agenda.
And thus Bergoglio isolated Cardinal Raymond Burke [removing him from the Congregation of Bishops] and sought to sideline the conservative American Cardinals Timothy Dolan and Daniel DiNardo, turning instead for a source of new cardinals to whom? To the serial abuser Cardinal McCarrick! One does not need to read the specific testimony of Carlo Maria Viganò to understand this: just scroll through the CVs of the Bergoglian Cardinals Wuerl, Cupich, Tobin, etc. Every single one is an intimate friend of McCarrick and every single one is someone close to the gay lobby!
Go here to read the rest.
Lisa Bourne at Lifesite News has an excellent summary of the Vigano affidavit:
1. Archbishop Viganò accused Pope Francis of covering up for McCarrick
In his testimony, Viganò calls on Pope Francis to “honestly state when he first learned about the crimes committed by McCarrick, who abused his authority with seminarians and priests.” Whether or not the Pope learned of the McCarrick allegations earlier, Viganò states, “the Pope learned about it from me on June 23, 2013 and continued to cover for him. He did not take into account the sanctions that Pope Benedict had imposed on him and made him his trusted counselor …”
Francis had asked Viganò during the June 2013 apostolic visit, “What is Cardinal McCarrick like?” but neither reacted nor seemed surprised when Viganò told him of the substantial dossier on McCarrick’s abuse allegations, Viganò said, and the pope seemed focused instead on the Bishops in the United States not being “ideologized.”
Viganò said as well that Francis’ behavior regarding the McCarrick matter was “no different” than in the Chilean Church’s sex abuse scandal. Francis had appointed Bishop Juan de la Cruz Barros to the See of Osorno against the advice of the Chilean bishops, first insulted the abuse victims, then later apologized, but continued to protect the two Chilean Cardinals Errazuriz and Ezzati.
“Even in the tragic affair of McCarrick, Pope Francis’s behavior was no different,” Viganò said. “He knew from at least June 23, 2013 that McCarrick was a serial predator. Although he knew that he was a corrupt man, he covered for him to the bitter end.”
2. Viganò called on Pope Francis to resign
Since the McCarrick revelations surfaced in June and with the August 14 release of the Pennsylvania grand jury report detailing 70 years of abuse of at least 1,000 victims perpetrated by around 300 priests in six dioceses, there have been escalating calls for those in the U.S. Church’s hierarchy with any role in the abuse cover-up to resign.
In his testimony, Archbishop Viganò extended that call to Francis for his part in enabling sexual abuse.
“In this extremely dramatic moment for the universal Church, he must acknowledge his mistakes and, in keeping with the proclaimed principle of zero tolerance, Pope Francis must be the first to set a good example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick’s abuses and resign along with all of them.”
3. Viganò named McCarrick as a ‘kingmaker’ for appointments in the Curia and U.S.
While at the Vatican guesthouse for a meeting of apostolic nuncios on June 20, 2013, McCarrick had indicated to Viganò that Francis had green-lighted his being free of any canonical restrictions, according to Viganò’s testimony.
“It was also clear that, from the time of Pope Francis’s election, McCarrick, now free from all constraints, had felt free to travel continuously, to give lectures and interviews,” Viganò states. “In a team effort with [Honduran] Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga [a top Francis advisor, also implicated in covering for widespread homosexual activity at the major seminary in his archdiocese and mismanagement of Church funds], he had become the kingmaker for appointments in the Curia and the United States, and the most listened to advisor in the Vatican for relations with the Obama administration.”
4. Viganò explained why Cardinal Raymond Burke was demoted
Cardinal Raymond Burke, a leading voice of orthodoxy in the Church, roundly criticized by liberals for holding the line on preserving Church doctrine and liturgy, has been unceremoniously demoted by Pope Francis more than once since Francis’s election – both from the Congregation of Bishops, which advises the Pope on choosing bishops, and from the Apostolic Signature, the Church’s highest court.
Viganò follows his naming of McCarrick as Francis’ “kingmaker” by stating that this led to Burke’s ouster from the Congregation of Bishops, and that Francis also then began bypassing the nuncio’s office in naming bishops
“This is how one explains that, as members of the Congregation for Bishops, the Pope replaced Cardinal Burke with Wuerl and immediately appointed Cupich, who was promptly made a cardinal,” he says. “With these appointments the Nunciature in Washington was now out of the picture in the appointment of bishops.”
5. Viganò explained how Chicago Cardinal Blasé Cupich and other liberal prelates were elevated
McCarrick as “kingmaker” not only facilitated pushing the nuncio out of naming bishops for the U.S., Viganò says, it opened the door to some of the most liberal appointments in the U.S. Church.
“The appointments of Blase Cupich to Chicago and Joseph W. Tobin to Newark were orchestrated by McCarrick, Maradiaga and Wuerl, united by a wicked pact of abuses by the first, and at least of cover-up of abuses by the other two,” Viganò writes. “Their names were not among those presented by the Nunciature for Chicago and Newark.”
“The appointment of (Bishop Robert) McElroy in San Diego was also orchestrated from above,” says Viganò, “with an encrypted peremptory order to me as Nuncio, by Cardinal Parolin: “Reserve the See of San Diego for McElroy.”
“McElroy was also well aware of McCarrick’s abuses,” the former nuncio states as well, “as can be seen from a letter sent to him by Richard Sipe on July 28, 2016.”
Go here to read the rest. Evil has flourished in the Church largely due to the secrecy that envelops the higher regions of the Church. Vigano has broken the code of Omerta and for this every decent Catholic owes him gratitude.
The Vatican has rolled back on a recommendation by Pope Francis that parents seek psychiatric help for children who show homosexual tendencies.
The pope made the comments to journalists as he was flying back to Rome from Ireland, but the Vatican later removed his phrase from its official account, saying he had not meant to suggest that homosexuality was a mental illness.
The pope was asked by a journalist what he would say to parents who observe homosexual traits in their children.
“When it shows itself from childhood, there is a lot that can be done through psychiatry, to see how things are. It is something else if it shows itself after 20 years,” he said.
He added that ignoring a child who showed homosexual tendencies was an “error of fatherhood or motherhood”.
However, when the Vatican later published the pope’s answer, the reference to psychiatry had been removed.
Go here to read the rest.
Cardinal “Nighty-night Baby” Tobin is taking a leaf from his master’s book and attempting to brazen it out:
The Archdiocese of Newark and Cardinal Joseph W. Tobin, C.Ss.R. express shock, sadness and consternation at the wide-ranging array of allegations published by the former apostolic nuncio to the United States of America, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, which cannot be understood as contributing to the healing of survivors of sexual abuse.
The factual errors, innuendo and fearful ideology of the “testimony” serve to strengthen our conviction to move ahead resolutely in protecting the young and vulnerable from any sort of abuse, while guaranteeing a safe and respectful environment where all are welcome and breaking down the structures and cultures that enable abuse.
Together with Pope Francis, we are confident that scrutiny of the claims of the former nuncio will help to establish the truth.
I love the phrase “fearful ideology”. Of course this is a non-response response since none of the allegations are actually responded to. Pope Francis and his merry band of miscreants really do believe that the Catholic laity consists of moronic sheep.
Hattip to commenter Greg Mockeridge. Remarkable when you consider the no criticism policy that Voris had as to the Pope. Well, he is calling a spade a spade now, and does not mince words.